It is almost impossible to halt any rush to war in the United States. One reason is the power of the military-industrial complex, but there are other key factors involved in warmongering. A major factor is the pragmatic alliance between the “mainstreams” of both the Left and the Right. Members of both these classes support a warfare state–sometimes for similar reasons, and at other times for different reasons. The result is the same–the United States gets involved in yet another war. Neoconservatives have taken over the Republican Party, with Ron Paul being a rare holdout. Neocons have an almost pathological desire to spread “democracy” throughout the world, by force if necessary. “Democracy” becomes a substitute religion that, like religion in the past, must be imposed on people for their own good. Those who disagree will feel the brunt of American missiles and bombs, especially if the country is an easy target. Iraq, for example, was weak, its economy and military capacity devastated by years of U. N. sanctions and bombing. Although American occupation has not been peaceful, with over 4000 American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead, Neocons believe that the price is “worth it” in order to produce a democratic Iraq out of a tribal culture that lacks a tradition of democracy. Supposedly a democratization of the Middle East and of Central Asia will help keep the region safe–but at times Neocons seem more concerned with keeping the region safe for Israel than with the national security of Israel than with the national security of the United States. But forced democratization in nations lacking a tradition of democracy will ultimately make the world more dangerous. The threat of the Muslim Brotherhood taking over the government of Egypt is real. Hamas won on the West Bank, although they are now working with the Palestinian Authority. Do we know that Libya post-Khadaffi would be better off than Libya Khadaffi? We do not–what if a Muslim Brotherhood-like group ended up ruling Libya? What if Libya became open to Al Qaida establishing a base of operations in Libya? Would promoting “democracy by force” really create a safer Middle East? Most likely, such an action creates a more dangerous Middle East and kills hundreds, if not thousands, of people. In the tribal culture found in many Middle Eastern countries, this can produce thousands of suicide bombers bent on revenge.

The worst warmongers are, all too often, Evangelical Christians who are part of the religious right. Many are premillenialists who allow their tainted theology to determine their reaction to Middle Eastern affairs. They strongly support Israel and long for war against the enemies of Israel. I have been called “dark” for my opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan–by a priest. Almost every conservative Evangelical I’ve known was hell-bent on invading Iraq. They would have been disappointed if the United States had not moved in and fought these nations. Some of them are absolutely bloodthirsty, wanting to “nuke” any country that “gets in America’s way.” I do not believe that Jesus would support such attitudes–certainly not the eagerness to go to war. This “God and country” Christianity is dangerous, reminding me of the movements by German churches in the 1930s to accommodate Nazi ideology. Every decision of the nation-state to go to war is supported, even if there are no good grounds for war. These “Christians” should be ashamed of themselves.

The Left is just as guilty of warmongering. The missionary-like zeal of Wilsonianism has long infected the left with the desire to “spread democracy” and to “nation-build.” Mrs. Clinton is an example of that kind of liberal warmongering ideology. Pro war Democrats outnumber anti-war Democrats in both houses of Congress. The only real debate was over the course of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, not whether to fight them in the first place. Mr. Obama, sadly, has bought into the Wilsonian Democratic point of view–with the president and the majority of representatives and senators in both parties supporting the warfare state, the United States becomes more guilty of shedding blood and having the blood of its young people shed in war.

Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich have opposed warmongering, as has Walter Jones of Tennessee. Paul and Jones are men of the right; Kuchinich is part of the old antiwar left. It will take such a coalition to overcome the combined power of Neocons, the Religious Right, and the Wilsonian Leftists in their path to war. The debt crisis may slow the drive for wars since wars are expensive. If Conservatives would behave as true conservatives; if the antiwar Left works together with them; and if traditional Christians would really follow the “Prince of Peace,” Congress would have no desire to expand the United States’ role in any of the current wars raging in the world. Changing people is difficult. Sadly, so is killing people. This needs to change.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Realizing that you are a football fan I can imagine that you are eagerly awaiting this early evening game. Even watching football one can experience “thaumazine”. My own preference is baseball though.
I want to mention that I appreciate the freedom this site manifests. I comment on a few other blogs and have one myself which is barely started at this time. On the one political site where I comment I of course encounter all that is nasty about what I call “secular fundamentalism”. On a couple of occasions I have made comments just to see what the response would be. For example, that women are on the whole smarter than men. Even female posters were outraged. One woman commented about the health benefits of abortion! Etc. It is ,most interesting experience. And there are some well educated persons posting: attorneys, college professors, etc. But almost without exception they are tied to vulgar slang, sarcasm, ridicule, and unreason at its best.
Nonetheless, the site, which is the one at Salon by Glenn Greenwald regularly has excellent articles. Glenn did undergraduate work in philosophy and seriously considered being a philosophy professor. Instead he became a civil rights attorney. So far his writings on war and violations of rights have been really excellent.
As regards war and war mongering I personally do not see any wisdom of writing about or justifying either a holy war or a just war. There may actually be times when war is the most compassionate alternative, but I think it best to not provide support for such a time which might be very rare. Our NATO humanitarian interventions have been filled with atrocities. I have over the years come across several excellent treatments of mobs. One was in a very lengthy and obscure novel. The author speaking from experience talked about the magnetism of a mob and how it draws ordinary persons into its vortex . . . It would now for example take only one violent event (a false flag perhaps) traceable to Iran to set a national mob in motion. I watched this happen prior to Desert Storm. Living in a university town I watched intelligent and well educated persons swallowing lie after lie and expressing real enthusiasm for killing. It was not easy to find anyone not in the fire of bringing death to utter strangers.
All I have to do is imagine one Iranian child suffering as a result of one missile strike to feel a deep sorrow for the idea of war as in any way good.
Obviously right inside our Christian man or woman or for that matter Muslim or Hindu man or woman we find something which I hesitate to call pagan or primitive as there is no particular evidence that primitive peoples are as violent and insane as our contemporaries. On the contrary. In any case the wells of compassion are quickly dry.
America has never really faced the genocide of the native American. Surely that was far worse than slavery. But then America and the West in general are extremely extroverted. The attempt to reduce subjectivity to objectivity is well underway. Nothing is so much to be avoided as oneself. What lurks in the heart of man is best left to an expert, now preferably a neuro-scientist.
At some point most individuals have to face themselves. Sickness or the approach of death as beautifully portrayed by Tolstoy. What will they find? All those regrettable deeds, an abundance of remorse, and lots of dark emotions. But what if our person before necessity were to propel him into this realm were to venture inward? Perhaps he would discover a new life on the other side of this wasteland. One of the greatest faults of the Catholic Church was the attitude it took up towards mystics. Many of our best scientists like Einstein and Schrodinger were mystically inclined. And clearly the best artists are. I tend to agree with Schopenhauer that music has a special place at the subject pole of presentation. He goes on to remark that the best philosophers are musically inclined.
The Church was rigidly dogmatic and always regarded the mystic as a threat. Imagine if science were that way. Then Einstein would have been imprisoned. Or perhaps Newton as well. The Church left too little room for growth and development. Perhaps it is from this source that the West so fears the interior realm. As a result though we are now witnessing the loss of any real courtesy and consideration in public life. Our presidential candidates are barbarians excepting Paul who is accounted for by terms like crazy. At some point this flight from the inner self will come to end–probably as the result of a terribly destructive third world war that will exceed what even those who planned and promoted it could have imagined. The NEW WORLD ORDER will be an incredible disorder that will require a millenium to recover from. [ Reading my comment for errors I notice an edge of fanaticism in myself! Hot subject and lots of agitation in the air plus February with its gloomy tone. ]
Best of luck and enjoy the Super Bowl.